Stripey, That entry has one glaring flaw: Female privilege exists and is used as a power against men as well. Much like any privilege though, those with it rarely see it as a privilege.

Without making an itemized and incomplete list of female privilege, I will posit the following: Women control most of the family and procreation privileges; and women extract more leniency from the law & society.

As I was told once, and as I tell others: When talking about privilege, you need to check yours at the door.

No, female privilege does not exist, and this is an example of an argument that has to be had over and over and over and over again, wearing people down. Are you watching, folks who complain about snarky, insulting feminists?

That's your opinion, and I think you're wrong. Again: those with the privilege rarely see it as such._________________**Goes back to hiding amongst the shrubbery**

And the general assumption that anything pro-Man is automatically anti-woman.

i can understand this way of thinking but in the same way i don't agree with a lot of the feminist jargon, this isn't quite true either. in either case why does the distinction need to be made? just like black/white prejudice, the discrimination starts to go away when the labels do. as long as this stays polar (men vs women) it will continue.

stripeypants wrote:

I am reasonably sure that sexism is a different concept than discrimination. Like privilege, it has to do with who has the power, and what is happening outside that one interaction.

sexism isn't different than discrimination, its a specific kind of discrimination.

that's right, women, even though you often have to fight to get basic birth control and you're often raped and not believed and have an appallingly hard time getting justice in court and your contraceptive and reproductive health is apparently a matter of political debate, you actually have the privilege of controlling family and procreation! it's a very subtle point. apparently you just can't see it and need a big strapping man to explain it to you.

and...men have, what, no control over procreation? despite being, you know, an integral part of procreation? well, obviously the male sex drive simply overrides all cognitive functions and all men become Boner Werewolves that cannot be stopped until they get to ejaculate all over something. and it's certainly not misandrist at all (oh yeah i went there) to think that men have no self-control!

Procreation privileges? Oooh does that mean I can have sex with plenty of people and never be shamed for it, not risk getting pregnant ever and not having to worry about abortions? Yay! Oh whoops, those are guy privileges.

Family privileges? Wtf are those?

Law leniency is the only one I can agree with that assaulted women will be believed more often than assaulted men, but that's because of the stereotype that women are weaker than men. THIS IS NOT A PRIVILEGE, IT'S A HARMFUL IDEALOGY. Let's not forget that a whole slew of rape victims are not believed in the first place (or ever).

You really need to look up the word privilege and its examples. Here, I'll help you out:

- Yinello doesn't have to worried about being rejected for a job offer for her skin color because she isn't black.

Your above posts are why I was intentionally vague. People get latched onto the same old tired points and stop looking at the whole picture. It's impossible to solve an algebra equation without working on both sides of the equal sign.

For example: Women's right to maternity leave. That is a specific woman's Privilege that you say doesn't exist. One of the main arguments for why women don't make the same pay as men is that they're "Forced" to stay at home with the children. Men then have an experience and a seniority edge in the workplace the next time a promotion comes available. Men then make more for a given job title. If the affected couple could choose which could take child leave, then neither side is forced to stay and take care of the children. The parent in the better position to can, without regard to gender. Given current trends, this is increasingly the men. As a result the experience & seniority can level out and the wage gap close.

But it can't happen if we only work on one side, if you use insults and derision. When you categorically deny having any control or power the only thing you're doing is trying to figure out who's the bigger victim._________________**Goes back to hiding amongst the shrubbery**

your entire effort to show that maternity leave is a "privilege" for women actually winds up showing how it is a disprivilege. you don't seem to know what you're talking about.

anyways, Salpta is mouthing yet another permutation of the old anti-equality argument that efforts towards equality don't count if they focus on the part of society that's getting the short end of the stick, as though every time a woman takes a step towards being recognized as an equal to her male peers, a man needs his fragile ego soothed, and if his fragile ego isn't soothed then the woman's step towards equality is meaningless. that argument isn't about "achieving equality," it's about derailing the effort to achieve equality.

the fact is, social problems are not algebra problems. after all, in the algebra problem, both sides of the equals sign actually are already equal and you just have to figure out how they are. so chalk that one up to a bad analogy.

Your above posts are why I was intentionally vague. People get latched onto the same old tired points and stop looking at the whole picture. It's impossible to solve an algebra equation without working on both sides of the equal sign.

For example: Women's right to maternity leave. That is a specific woman's Privilege that you say doesn't exist. One of the main arguments for why women don't make the same pay as men is that they're "Forced" to stay at home with the children. Men then have an experience and a seniority edge in the workplace the next time a promotion comes available. Men then make more for a given job title. If the affected couple could choose which could take child leave, then neither side is forced to stay and take care of the children. The parent in the better position to can, without regard to gender. Given current trends, this is increasingly the men. As a result the experience & seniority can level out and the wage gap close.

But it can't happen if we only work on one side, if you use insults and derision. When you categorically deny having any control or power the only thing you're doing is trying to figure out who's the bigger victim.

What f*cking right to maternity leave? Seriously? In the USA, I have no right to maternity leave. I have no real enforced right to not be outright FIRED because I'm pregnant, or discriminated against from being hired because of pregnancy, or even the possibility of pregnancy. Some nicey-nice people, or those who have been otherwise pressured into it, can choose to not be utter douche-canoes about that sort of thing, but there is no universally recognized and unquestioned -right- to it. The fact that paternity leave is even rarer doesn't make maternity leave any kind of societal privilege that women don't even have to worry about.

Oh, and as for society and the law being more lenient towards women, that's not my experience at all. The whole "well behaved" expectation tends to mean we're slapped with every minute fee, fine, ticket, citation, and bureaucratic blockade we run into, where men tend to be able to skate around them a LOT more easily and frequently. Or how about how domestic violence issues, which mostly (but not always, but mostly, so get over it,) affect women and children, are only just now coming out of the dark ages as to how they're viewed and prioritized, and there are still laws on the books, and a lack thereof, that stem from the old way of thinking of DV as a "private" issue, not to be interfered with from the outside.

Reproductive control? Were you not paying attention this last election cycle to all the troglodytes who were, and still are, spouting out law proposals that would remove birth control access AND make it damn near impossible to get an abortion even in the case of rape situations? Do you know how many states have laws on the books that allow -rapists- to sue for parental rights over any kids that result from their violent action, tying them to their victim in a cycle of perpetual control and interference for life?

Your family privilege bullshit just sounds like one more version of, "but woman is queen in the domestic sphere," republican motherhood tripe. That's not privilege. That's a washing of male hands of domestic responsibility. When money matters, or decisions about where to move the family in order to pursue work, or anything like that comes up to make rubber meet road, you see where the power still tends to actually fall.

And none of that even touches on the fact that your examples of supposed privilege still only apply broadly to the white middle-class demographic. You want whole picture? (If you really mean whole picture and aren't just whining that people aren't focusing on the points YOU want them to focus on.) You have to look at all the people in a society, and not just the cherry-picked favored-by-the-benevolent-patriarchy segment that maks your point look good.

reading through this thread it occurs to me that one of the major negative effects of the patriarchy for men is that it through the media, etc. men are lead to believe that they have to live up to this unrealistic concept of masculinity and in trying to attain this notion of manliness men further perpetuate a culture of sexism and discrimination against women. so to the people who complain that men are being marginalized too, yes that may be true, but men fighting their perceived discrimination also results in the further marginalization of women. that's just an unacceptable price to pay for men to feel a little better about their lives._________________FormerlyGreen_Finn

although the effects can be seen in many places, most of this is based off one key difference between men and women, stature. when a guy goes out cycling at night why doesn't he have to take mace with him like a female would? size and strength. the average male is both larger and stronger than the average female. even if you compare with equal height, at 5'2, 5'9, '6'3, the average male will still be larger and stronger than the average female. Thatís a major deterrent. up until just recently (in a historical sense), women almost NEEDED men. if for no other reason than to protect them from other men. because of this men held not only more power but more leverage. its true men and women have different strengths intelligence wise, but on the whole they can be seen as equal in this respect. However, in a time when strength was a match for intellect and often more valued, how could a woman compete in value with a man? Men are stronger and equally intelligent, and since most jobs were dependent on both, the situation was ďwhy train a woman when you could train a man?Ē not to mention that women were charged with taking care of the children. you might ask why. besides being the ďcommon senseĒ answer, women have the kids, women take care of the kids, they were most likely pregnant. when farming is not just the a source of food but a source of income itís good to have some helpers, read "children," to divide the work with. health care was far from what it is today or even 50 years ago. you needed to have a glut of children because you planed on a good number of them dying before they even hit their middle teens. so once every two to four years... . since they were bound to the home more than men women generally were expected to do the house work as well. add this to a world where when you hit 45 you're starring death in the face and its not too hard to see why women have the legacy that they do, major lack of power. the last 200 years have been fraught with innovation, the last 100 especially. life expectancy has doubled, infant mortality has dropped incredibly, menial labor is almost non-existent, and wars are fought with weapons not people. this has created a world where women can now have a say in things because as strength becomes less valued the gap in gender value decreases. women now have more time than ever before as well. house chores are gone, no fetching water, washing clothes in the river, or even cooking if they don't feel like it. women can live independently and if they do decide to find a mate most any task that can be done by one gender can be done by the other. which means no one task can be considered gender specific and thus total work can be divided with equality. not to mention that their dependence on the strength of men is gone as well, technology is the great equalizer and the law is their protector... mostly. women now tend to be oblivious to a lot of this. today's women have been raised in a world where this is common place. they can taunt and agitate men as much as they want, mostly without fear. just in 1920 women were finally deemed worthy to vote after education and jobs became more available to them. at that time it was still seen as ok to slap a woman upside her head if she got out of line(something that would land you in prison today).... with all of this I'm not trying to say that equality isn't the end goal, it is. but think about what happens when you strip away the imposed order and understand why things are the way they are. Part of the reason women have lower salaries is because businesses can still get away with it. occurrence of rape is going down and usually happens when at least one party is under the influence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_States#Rape_statistics
and... i don't feel like arguing about abortion(suffice to say i'm not FOR it and the birth control debate should be less about actual birth control and more about male accountability)
when a gender believes that they are better(not specifically but generally), smarter(not specifically but generally), or deserve superior treatment (not specifically but generally) based solely on their gender, that to me is sexism. Men are considered stronger than women, not sexism. Women are considered to better at multitasking than men, not sexism. every man is stronger than any woman, sexism. Itís easier for a man to rape a woman than the other way around, is that sexism? No. men can feel safer at night than women can, is that sexist? No, thatís an effect of the previous. men, but not women, can have sex with as many people as they want and their reputation isnít affected, not sure that oneís exactly accurate but yes thatís sexist. itís easier for a woman to get away with rape, that is sexist. these sorts of things go away as gender roles become less defined. All in all itís an amazing world we live in. women are considered nigh on to equal with men which has literally never happened before. IMO we may never get to this magical place called equality and understanding. although itís a wonderful goal itís likely humanity just isnít capable of it. be grateful for the time and place you were born ladies. You never know, it may be short lived.

Last edited by Reader1 on Tue Apr 30, 2013 10:48 am; edited 1 time in total

Your above posts are why I was intentionally vague. People get latched onto the same old tired points and stop looking at the whole picture. It's impossible to solve an algebra equation without working on both sides of the equal sign.

You mean the above are instances in which the vague claims you made are demonstrably wrong (reproductive privilege? really?). It's not our fault you were vague and, through vagueness, wrong. You made an unsubstantiated argument, they countered with evidence. That's how it works.

Quote:

For example: Women's right to maternity leave. That is a specific woman's Privilege that you say doesn't exist. One of the main arguments for why women don't make the same pay as men is that they're "Forced" to stay at home with the children. Men then have an experience and a seniority edge in the workplace the next time a promotion comes available. Men then make more for a given job title. If the affected couple could choose which could take child leave, then neither side is forced to stay and take care of the children. The parent in the better position to can, without regard to gender. Given current trends, this is increasingly the men. As a result the experience & seniority can level out and the wage gap close.

This sounds like a way in which both parents are harmed by current systemic discrimination. Women with good careers and men who want to spend their time with their families are both pigeon-holed into gender stereotyped roles, rather than doing what is best for them and their families.

Quote:

But it can't happen if we only work on one side, if you use insults and derision. When you categorically deny having any control or power the only thing you're doing is trying to figure out who's the bigger victim.

There's no contest. No one who understands privilege could claim men are harmed by it as much as women. When was the last time Congress debated whether you could have a medical procedure? How many states have laws dictating what you can do with your penis (shy of sticking it in someone who doesn't want it)? When was the last time you had to have an ultrasound of your testicles because of the religious beliefs of your state legislators?

But you're right, patriarchy hurts everyone, and we say that here all the time. If you like, I will dig up quotes of us saying it over, and over, and over._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

although the effects can be seen in many places, most of this is based off one key difference between men and women, stature. when a guy goes out cycling at night why doesn't he have to take mace with him like a female would? size and strength. the average male is both larger and stronger than the average female. even if you compare with equal height, at 5'2, 5'9, '6'3, the average male will still be larger and stronger than the average female. Thatís a major deterrent. up until just recently (in a historical sense), women almost NEEDED men. if for no other reason than to protect them from other men. because of this men held not only more power but more leverage. its true men and women have different strengths intelligence wise, but on the whole they can be seen as equal in this respect. However, in a time when strength was a match for intellect and often more valued, how could a woman compete in value with a man? Men are stronger and equally intelligent, and since most jobs were dependent on both, the situation was ďwhy train a woman when you could train a man?Ē not to mention that women were charged with taking care of the children. you might ask why. besides being the ďcommon senseĒ answer, women have the kids, women take care of the kids, they were most likely pregnant. when farming is not just the a source of food but a source of income itís good to have some helpers, read "children," to divide the work with. health care was far from what it is today or even 50 years ago. you needed to have a glut of children because you planed on a good number of them dying before they even hit their middle teens. so once every two to four years... . since they were bound to the home more than men women generally were expected to do the house work as well. add this to a world where when you hit 45 you're starring death in the face and its not too hard to see why women have the legacy that they do, major lack of power. the last 200 years have been fraught with innovation, the last 100 especially. life expectancy has doubled, infant mortality has dropped incredibly, menial labor is almost non-existent, and wars are fought with weapons not people. this has created a world where women can now have a say in things because as strength becomes less valued the gap in gender value decreases. women now have more time than ever before as well. house chores are gone, no fetching water, washing clothes in the river, or even cooking if they don't feel like it. women can live independently and if they do decide to find a mate most any task that can be done by one gender can be done by the other. which means no one task can be considered gender specific and thus total work can be divided with equality. not to mention that their dependence on the strength of men is gone as well, technology is the great equalizer and the law is their protector... mostly. women now tend to be oblivious to a lot of this. today's women have been raised in a world where this is common place. they can taunt and agitate men as much as they want, mostly without fear. just in 1920 women were finally deemed worthy to vote after education and jobs became more available to them. at that time it was still seen as ok to slap a woman upside her head if she got out of line(something that would land you in prison today).... with all of this I'm not trying to say that equality isn't the end goal, it is. but think about what happens when you strip away the imposed order and understand why things are the way they are. Part of the reason women have lower salaries is because businesses can still get away with it. occurrence of rape is going down and usually happens when at least one party is under the influence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_States#Rape_statistics
and... i don't feel like arguing about abortion(suffice to say i'm not FOR it and the birth control debate should be less about actual birth control and more about male accountability)
when a gender believes that they are better(not specifically but generally), smarter(not specifically but generally), or deserve superior treatment (not specifically but generally) based solely on their gender, that to me is sexism. Men are considered stronger than women, not sexism. Women are considered to better at multitasking than men, not sexism. every man is stronger than any woman, sexism. Itís easier for a man to rape a woman than the other way around, is that sexism? No. men can feel safer at night than women can, is that sexist? No, thatís an effect of the previous. men, but not women, can have sex with as many people as they want and their reputation isnít affected, not sure that oneís exactly accurate but yes thatís sexist. itís easier for a woman to get away with rape, that is sexist. these sorts of things go away as gender roles become less defined. All in all itís an amazing world we live in. women are considered nigh on to equal with men which has literally never happened before. IMO we may never get to this magical place called equality and understanding. although itís a wonderful goal itís likely humanity just isnít capable of it. be grateful for the time and place you were born ladies. You never know, it may be short lived.

inferring any characteristics or abilities based solely on sex is sexism. saying white people are smarter than blacks because they have historically out performed them on intelligence tests is racist, so how is making similar claims about the abilities of men and women not sexist?_________________FormerlyGreen_Finn

It's not sexist if it's supported by evidence. Intellectually, the differences between men and women as groups is smaller than the difference between individual men and women (that is, we're basically the same). In order for a claim to make sense it must be generally true that the average man would perform better or worse than the average woman, and for most skills this isn't true. The bell curves for many (many) skills are so close that the average man falls within the bell curve of women, and the average woman falls within the bell curve of men, meaning there's very little difference. You can hear Steven Pinker talk about all of this in his debate with Elizabeth Spelke in The Science of Gender and Science, which is excellent and worth a look.

Diane Halpern writes, "The literature on sex differences in cognitive abilities is filled with inconsistent findings, contradictory theories, and emotional claims that are unsupported by the research. Yet despite all the noise in the data, clear and consistent messages could be heard. There are real and in some cases sizable sex differences with respect to some cognitive abilities. Socialization practices are undoubtedly important, but there is also good evidence that biological sex differences play a role in establishing and maintaining cognitive sex differences, a conclusion I wasn't prepared to make when I began reviewing the relevant literature."

Pinker says, "There are some important corollaries of having two overlapping normal distributions. One is that a normal distribution falls off according to the negative exponential of the square of the distance from the mean. That means that even when there is only a small difference in the means of two distributions, the more extreme a score, the greater the disparity there will be in the two kinds of individuals having such a score. That is, the ratios get more extreme as you go farther out along the tail. If we hold a magnifying glass to the tail of the distribution, we see that even though the distributions overlap in the bulk of the curves, when you get out to the extremes the difference between the two curves gets larger and larger.

For example, it's obvious that distributions of height for men and women overlap: it's not the case that all men are taller than all women. But while at five foot ten there are thirty men for every woman, at six feet there are two thousand men for every woman. Now, sex differences in cognition tend not to be so extreme, but the statistical phenomenon is the same."_________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

It's worth noting that which curve is men and which is women depends on the skill - fine motor control, symbolic logic, word problems, reading speed, etc. tend to flip back and forth between who's better._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman